Question of Palestine home || Permalink || About UNISPAL || Search

English (pdf) ||Arabic||Chinese||Français||Русский||Español||



Follow UNISPAL Twitter RSS

UNITED
NATIONS
S

        Security Council
S/PV.2573
12 March 1985

Fortieth year
Official Records

2573rd MEETING
Held in New York on Tuesday, 12 March 1985, at 10.30 a.m.



CONTENTS



Provisional agenda (S/Agenda/S/Agenda/2573) .........................pg. 1

Adoption of the agenda ..............................................pg. 1

The situation in the Middle East:

Letter dated 25 February 1985 from the Permanent Representative of Lebanon to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/16983).............................................................pg.1




NOTE

Symbols of United Nations documents are composed of capital letters combined with figures. Mention of such a symbol indicates a reference to a United Nations document.

Documents of the Security Council (symbol S/...) are normally published in quarterly Supplements of the Official Records of the Security Council. The date of the document indicates the supplement in which it appears or in which information about it is given.

The resolutions of the Security Council, numbered in accordance with a system adopted in 1964, are published in yearly volumes of Resolutions and Decisions of the Security Council. The new system, which has been applied retroactively to resolutions adopted before 1 January 1965, became fully operative on that date.



President: Mr. Blaise RABETAFIKA (Madagascar).

Present: The representatives of the following States: Australia, Burkina Faso, China, Denmark, Egypt, France, India, Madagascar, Pent, Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America.

Provisional agenda (S/Agenda/2573)

1. Adoption of the agenda

2. The situation in the Middle East:
Letter dated 25 February 1985 from the Permanent Representative of Lebanon to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/16983).

The meeting was called to order at 11.35 a.m.
Adoption of the agenda

The agenda was adopted.

The situation in the Middle East:

Letter dated 25 February 1985 from the Permanent Representative of Lebanon to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/16983)

1. The PRESIDENT (interpretation from French): In accordance with the decisions taken by the Council at previous meetings [2568th, 2570th and 2572nd meetings], I invite the representative of Lebanon to take a place at the Council table; I invite the representatives of Algeria, Bangladesh, Cuba, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, Democratic Yemen, the German Democratic Republic, Indonesia, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Israel, Jordan, Nicaragua, Pakistan, Poland, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, the Sudan, the Syrian Arab Republic, the United Arab Emirates, Viet Nam and Yugoslavia to take the places reserved for them at the side of the Council chamber; I invite the representative of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) to take the place reserved for him at the side of the Council chamber.

At the invitation of the President, Mr. Fakhotay (Lebanon) took a place at the Council table; Mr. Djoudi (Algeria), Mr. Wasiuddin (Bangladesh), Mr. Oramas Oliva (Cuba), Mr. PhedonosVadet (Cyprus), Mr. Cesar (Czechoslovakia), Mr. Al-Alfi (Democratic Yemen), Mr. Ott (German Democratic Republic), Mr. Alatas (Indonesia), Mr. Rajaie-Khorassani (Islamic Republic of Iran), Mr. Netanyahu (Israel), Mr. Kasrawi (Jordan), Mr. Ieaza Gallard (Nicaragua), Mr. Shah Nawaz (Pakistan), Mr. Nowak (Poland), Mr. Al-Kawari (Qatar), Mr. Shihabi (Saudi Arabia), Mr. Sand (Senegal), Mr. Omer (Sudan), Mr. El-Fattal (Syrian Arab Republic), Mr. Al-Shaali (United Arab Emirates), Mr. Le Kim Chung (Viet Nam) and Mr. Golob (Yugoslavia) took the places reserved for them at the side of the Council chamber; Mr. Terzi (Palestine liberation Organization) took the place reserved for him at the side of the Council chamber.

2. The PRESIDENT (interpretation from French): The first speaker is the representative of Cyprus. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

3. Mr. PHEDONOS-VADET (Cyprus): I should like at the outset to congratulate you, Sir, on your assumption of the presidency of the Council for the month of March, and to express my appreciation to Mr. Krishnan of India for the exemplary manner in which he presided over the work of the Council in February.

4. Let me also express the grief of the people and the Government of the Republic of Cyprus on the passing away of Mr. Konstantin Chernenko, President of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republican. President Chernenko will be remembered for the reputation he gained as a tireless worker for world peace and as a leader for the progress of the Soviet peoples.

5. It is with grave concern that the Government of Cyprus views the latest Israeli operations and practices which the representative of Lebanon has brought to the attention of the Council in his statement of 28 February at the 2068th meeting, and the continued occupation of southern Lebanon. We express our deepest regret at the worsening situation which threatens peace and security in the area.

6. In this connection, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and international conventions, more particularly the fourth Geneva Convention,1/ are recalled, as is the applicability of the provisions of that Convention to the Lebanese territories occupied by the State of Israel.

7. The continuing Israeli practices and measures against the civilian population in southern Lebanon, western Bekaa and the Rashaya district are in violation of the rules and principles of international law, and in particular the provisions of the fourth Geneva Convention, and should immediately be brought to an end.

8. Attention is drawn to the Political Declaration of the Seventh Conference of Heads of State or Government of Non-Aligned Countries, held in March 1983 at New Delhi [see S/15675 and Corr.] and 2, annex], and the final communiqué adopted by the Meeting of Ministers for Foreign Affairs and Heads of Delegations of Non-Aligned Coun­tries to the General Assembly at its thirty-ninth session, held in October 1984 [S/16773, annex], as well as the communiqué adopted on 6 March 1985 by the Co-ordinating Bureau of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries at an urgent meeting held in New York [5/17008, annex], which condemned these practices and measures. Moreover, the Co-ordinating Bureau of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries, in its communiqué of 6 March, expressed its support for the efforts of the Government of Lebanon to extend its authority over all of its territory and for its determination to restore peace and order in the areas to be evacuated by Israel and to ensure the safety and security of the civilian populations in those areas, including the Palestinian refugees in the camps [ibid., para. 4].

9. We strongly reiterate the need for Council resolutions on Lebanon, particularly resolutions 425 (1978), 508 (1982) and 509 (1982), to be urgently implemented to ensure the immediate and unconditional withdrawal of Israeli forces from all Lateness territories.

10. The Government and people of Cyprus reaffirm their unfailing and full solidarity with the people of friendly and neighbouring Lebanon and reiterate support for the sovereignty, independence, territorial integrity and unity of Lebanon and for its right to exercise its sovereignty throughout its territory.

11. It is earnestly hoped that urgent Security Council action, so necessary in bringing peace and stability to Lebanon, will finally be taken.

12. The Council has before it draft resolution S/17000, submitted by Lebanon. Its adoption by the Council would demonstrate a clear determination by the international community to ensure respect for the sovereignty, independence, territorial integrity and unity of Lebanon and its profound solidarity with and sympathy for its much tormented people.

13. The PRESIDENT (interpretation from French): The next speaker is the representative of Indonesia. I invite him to take a plan at the Council table and to make his statement.

14. Mr. ALATAS (Indonesia): Mr. President, allow me to preface my statement by expressing the sense of loss and deep sympathy of my Government and my delegation on the passing away of Konstantin Chernenko, General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and President of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet. We are saddened that he is no longer with us at a time when the world has reached a critical juncture in the efforts to strengthen international peace and security, efforts to which as a world leader he made significant contributions. I would be greatly indebted if the Soviet delegation could kindly convey our heartfelt condolences to the Government and people of the Soviet Union and to the members of the bereaved family in their hour of sorrow.

15. I should like to begin by extending to you, Sir, the warm congratulations of the Indonesian delegation on your assumption of the presidency of the Council for this month. We take particular satisfaction in seeing you in the Chair because the country you represent, a fellow member of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries, is Indonesia's near neighbour to the west across a span of water which, far from dividing our two countries and peoples, has historically contributed to the nurturing of close ties of friendship and cultural and political affinity between us. Your proven diplomatic skills and vast experience give us confidence that the Council's deliberations on the matter before us will be conducted in a most efficacious way. I should also like to pay high tribute to your predecessor, Mr. Krishnan of India, for the exemplary manner in which he guided the Council's work during the month of February.

16. My delegation's participation in the Council's debate is to express Indonesia's sense of outrage at what is happening in Lebanon at present as a consequence of the brutal acts of terror unleashed by Israel against the civilian population of southern Lebanon, the western Bekaa and the Rashaya district. Our indignation is heightened given the fact that Israel is continuing and even escalating such practices in the face of numerous Security Council resolutions and worldwide censure, and at the very time the Council is being seized of the question. Indeed, as we are meeting today the press has reported yet another barbarous raid against the village of Zarariyah causing indiscriminate destruction and a death toll of at least 30.

17. The representative of Lebanon, in his statements before the Council [2568th, 2570th and 2572nd meetings] and in his letters to the Secretary-General, has recorded in graphic detail the atrocities that are being perpetrated by the Israeli occupation forces, including the siege of villages and towns, killings, mass arrests and detentions, forced exile and the demolition of schools and homes. They paint a compelling picture of the humiliation, hardships and horrors to which the people in southern Lebanon have been subjected ever since the Israeli invasion.

18. Thus while there is no need for me to go into further details, my delegation must register its particular revulsion at the incident involving the large-scale attack launched on the village of M'arakah, as described in document S/16997. Israel's utter disregard for civilian lives and the sanctity of places of worship was appallingly demonstrated when, with cold-blooded premeditation, the village mosque was blown up at a time when as many as 200 people were gathered inside. We condemn this dastardly attack and deeply regret the resultant death and injury to so many innocent civilians.

19. Israel has tried to justify its flouting of the most elementary norms of international law and morality with a variety of excuses. But for Israel to equate the heroic nationalist resistance of the Lebanese people-the legitimate armed struggle of the people of Lebanon against foreign aggression and occupation-with terrorism, and then to react indiscriminately with the unbridled force of its war machine, can only be described as the height of insolence. Clearly Israel cannot hide behind the pretext of self-defence to justify its illegal presence in southern Lebanon, nor can it rationalize its inhuman acts and practices. Indeed, as the occupying Power. Israel must not be allowed to evade the onus of responsibility to the international community for its gross violation of the Charter of the United Nations, of the fourth Geneva Convention 1/ and of other norms of civilized behaviour.

20. In the midst of these provocations, the constructive and statesmanlike attitude of the Lebanese Government has been most praiseworthy. We commend its sincere attempts to bring about an orderly and planned withdrawal of the Israeli occupation forces and to make arrangements to achieve security and stability after the withdrawal through the co-ordinated deployment of the Lebanese army in the vacated areas.

21. However, these efforts by Lebanon at the military talks in Nagoura under the commendable initiative of the Secretary-General were aborted due, inter alia, to Israel's refusal to provide a detailed timetable for its withdrawal. Instead, Israel has now embarked on a unilateral staged withdrawal-or, rather, redeployment-of its forces, thus presenting Lebanon and the United Nations with an arbitrary fait accompli.

22. Israel's intransigence in this regard and its unwillingness to allow the Lebanese army to play any role can only be seen as part and parcel of its persistent attempts to set up illegitimate local forces in southern Lebanon as a surrogate authority under its total control. It is with this same sinister motive in mind that Israel has willfully violated the terms of Security Council resolution 425 (1978) by denying the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) forces access to areas south of the Litani River and attempting to remove United Nations personnel already deployed in those areas. My Government regards the implications of these developments with grave concern, as they directly contravene Council resolutions 508 (1982) and 509 (1982), the latter of which calls on Israel to withdraw all its military forces forthwith and unconditionally to the internationally recognized boundaries and reaffirms the need for respect for the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Lebanon.

23. The world has witnessed time and again the futility of the use of force as an instrument of conflict resolution. Indeed, Israel's invasion and occupation of Lebanon has not achieved for it any of its stated objectives. On the contrary, it has pushed the spiral of violence, death and destruction in the region to even greater heights, while embedding Israel in a quagmire of its own making from which it is now frantically trying to extricate itself.

24. In the view of my delegation, the only way to put an effective end to the illegal Israeli occupation of Lebanon is by scrupulously implementing the relevant resolutions of the Council, and in particular resolutions 425 (1978), 508 (1982) and 509 (1982).

25. In the face of Israel's open defiance, we trust the Council will act resolutely and with a sense of urgency to reassert its authority. We hope that the Council will speak with one voice in condemning the inhuman Israeli practices and measures against the civilian population in southern Lebanon, the western Bekaa and the Rashaya district and in demanding that Israel desist forthwith from such practices.

26. The sovereignty, independence, unity and territorial integrity of Lebanon must be respected. The legitimacy and effectiveness of the Lebanese army must be upheld; all further unilateral acts by Israel should be stopped; and UNIFIL should be allowed to play the indispensable role entrusted to it by the relevant Security Council resolutions.

27. As the Co-ordinating Bureau of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries has already done in the communiqué adopted on 6 March at its urgent meeting held in New York, the international community should extend full support to the efforts of the Lebanese Government to establish its authority over all of its territory and to its determination to restore peace and order in the areas to be vacated by Israel and to ensure the safety and security of the civilian populations in those areas, including the Palestinian refugees [S/17008, annex, para. 4]

28. It is only by pursuing this course of action that the Council and the world community at large can effectively address the awesome dimensions of the tragedy in Lebanon.

29. The Indonesian Government and people have followed the unfolding of recent developments in Lebanon with feelings of deep distress and mounting concern. At this time my delegation wishes to reiterate its full solidarity with and support for Lebanon and its fraternal people in their quest for peace and justice in unfettered independence and sovereignty.

30. The PRESIDENT (interpretation from French): The next speaker on my list is the representative of Nicaragua. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

31. Mr. ICAZA GALLARD (Nicaragua) (interpretation from Spanish): At the outset I should like on behalf of my delegation, Government and people to convey to the Soviet Government and people our sorrow and condolences on the death of Konstantin Chernenko, the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and President of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet. We are convinced that his successor in such lofty responsibilities will pursue efforts to ensure international peace, coexistence and the development of peoples, as did Mr. Chernenko in his activities.

32. I should like to congratulate you, Sir, on your assumption of the presidency of the Council for the current month. Your country and mine enjoy excellent relations based on mutual respect and co-operation, born of our need to face similar problems and to be dedicated to the principles of non-alignment in our international conduct. This, together with the special affection and admiration we feel for you, which can be explained by your well-known devotion to justice and your great experience in the diplomatic world, assures us that the Council is indeed in good hands.

33. Similarly, I should like to express our thanks to Mr. Natarajan Krishnan of India for the way in which he guided the proceedings of the Council last month.

34. As this is the first time we have spoken before the Council this year, after having completed our two-year term as a non-permanent member, I should like to thank all delegations with which we have worked. We should like to extend to them equal co-operation on the basis of friendship and respect in all areas of the United Nations. Our congratulations go to the new members of the Council convinced that they will discharge their responsibilities and help this body discharge the functions entrusted to it by the Charter of the United Nations.

35. Approximately six months ago, when we were still members of the Council, it considered Israeli practices in occupied Arab territories [2552nd to 2556th meetings]. At that time-and not because of our position nor the position of the non-aligned countries, which have always had a clear position on the situation in the Middle last-the Council was unable to adopt a draft resolution that basically emphasized humanitarian considerations [S/16732].

36. The current situation that we are considering, involving Israeli practices perpetrated against the population of southern Lebanon, western Bekaa and the Rashaya district, regarding which the representative of Lebanon has on three occasions in the course of this debate [2568th, 2570th and 2572nd meetings] given us a great number of facts, proves that the Council's silence is invariably interpreted by Israel as constituting a blank cheque for it to pursue its policy of expansionism and illegal occupation of Arab territories, extermination of the Palestinian people and terrorism against the Arab population in general.

37. Today's newspapers carry new articles on events transpiring in southern Lebanon that are linked to other events perpetrated by the Israeli occupation forces in M'arakah and Beirut last week. Many innocent lives have been lost. Reference has been made to the existence of a "spiral of violence", a "vicious circle" of violence. However, if we do not look further than that assertion, which is designed to define an apparent reality, we see simply an attempt-often unintentional, but sometimes with ill intent-to hide the real causes of the violence. Here we have an illegal occupation of part of the territory of a sovereign country an illegal occupation that has lasted several years, flying in the face of clearly expressed resolutions of the Council-in particular, resolution 509 (1982), which demands "that Israel withdraw all its military forces forthwith and unconditionally to the internationally recognized boundaries of Lebanon". This illegal occupation is contrary to all the principles and norms of international law. The occupying Power's policy, which is to use permanent and systematic violence against the Arab and Palestinian populations in the illegally occupied territories, involves a constant and systematic disrespect for the most fundamental rights of those populations. The occupying Power itself does not hesitate to describe it as an "iron fist" policy.

38. I shall not repeat here the endless chain of examples that make a reality of this "iron fist" policy. I need only mention the invasion of M'arakah, south of the Litani. The barbaric acts committed by the occupying forces culminating in the blowing up of the mosque in which 200 innocent people had sought refuge, are a clear example of the "spiral of violence" many representatives have mentioned here.

39. How many times will it be necessary to repeat and recall these deeds and concepts? There is an increasingly clear deliberate tendency to subvert language and falsify facts. Therefore, we could not but show our perplexity when we heard a permanent member of the Council state at one of the recent meetings:

"The Charter of the United Nations tells us that its central tenet must be freedom from fear, freedom from threats against the territorial integrity or political independence of a State, freedom from threats against any Member of the United Nations-certainly against any member of the Security Council" [2570th meeting, para. 127].

We could not help showing our perplexity then we heard that same member say:

"No process of discussion, debate, compromise and rational decision-making can possibly take place under the threat of violence" [Ibid., para. 131].

Said by any other Member of the United Nations of the Security Council, that would be no more than the reaffirmation of a principle that we all believe in and jointly defend, and on which our international conduct is based. In view of who said it, we have only two alternatives: either we should congratulate that representative on what seems to be an intention by her country to conduct its policy in accordance with an unalterable principle of the Charter-in which case we should ask her to advise its President to conduct himself similarly-or we should interpret those words as a mere statement totally lacking in seriousness.

40. Our position with regard to the situation in Lebanon has been clear from the very outset, and it became even clearer during the two years we served as a non-permanent member of the Council. That position is fully in accordance with the position frequently stated by the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries-most recently, in its communiqué of 6 March [S/17008, annex]. It can be summed up as follows: full support for the relevant resolutions of the Council, in particular resolutions 425 (1978) 508 (1982) and 509 (1982) the latter of which calls for the immediate and unconditional withdrawal of all Israel's military forces behind the internationally recognized boundaries of Lebanon. Our position is for a clear and vigorous condemnation of all Israeli practices and measures against the civilian population in illegally occupied sovereign Lebanese territory, practices and measures in flagrant contravention of the provisions of the fourth Geneva Convention. 1/ Finally, our position is one of unconditional and unreserved support for the sovereignty, independence, nonalignment and territorial unity and integrity of Lebanon, and for the people and the Government of Lebanon in their just struggle against the occupying forces.

41. We hope that on this occasion the Council will measure up to its responsibilities in voting for the draft resolution before it [S/17000), whose provisions entirely accord with my Government's position on this matter.

42. The PRESIDENT (interpretation from French): The next speaker is the representative of Poland. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

43. Mr. NOWAK (Poland): The delegation of Poland wishes to express its sorrow at the passing away of the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party and President of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the Soviet Union, Konstantin Ustinovich Chernenko. Together with the fraternal Soviet people, we mourn the passing of their leader, who devoted his life to selfless and tireless creative labour to benefit his own people and country and to serve the cause of peace in the world at large. Konstantin Ustinovich Chernenko won sincere respect in my country and contributed to deepening relations between Poland and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Permit me to convey to the delegations of the Soviet Union and the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, and through them to Comrade Chernenko family and the people of the Soviet Union, our condolences and expression of profound sympathy and great sorrow.

44. Allow me at the outset to congratulate you, Sir, on your accession to the presidency for this month. May I express our confidence that your diplomatic skills experience and wisdom will contribute to the efficiency and fruitfulness of the Council's deliberations.

45. At the same time, I wish to express the sincere appreciation of my delegation to Mr. Krishnan, the representative of India for the way in which he guided the Council's proceedings in February.

46. The delegation of Poland asked to be invited to speak before the Council in order to express the Polish Government's concern and indignation over the Israeli acts of repression in southern Lebanon and to support the demands of Lebanon, namely, to stop Israeli measures against the civilian population and to withdraw its military forces forthwith and unconditionally to the internationally recognized boundaries of Lebanon.

47. Every day brings new reports of widespread Israeli repressive measures which are exacerbating tensions, deepening resentment among the population and strengthening its support for armed resistance to the occupying Power. It goes without saying that this new policy of the Israeli authorities, called by some of its own leaders an "iron fist" policy, poses t serious threat to peace and security not only in the region but also in the world at large.

48. The delegation of Poland fully shares the opinion repeated by the majority of delegations speaking before the Council that the actions of the Israeli occupation authorities are in clear violation of the principles of the Charter of the United Nations, the provisions of the fourth Geneva Convention 1/ and other norms of international law. The Israelis' attempts to vindicate the actions of their occupying forces boil down to trying to justify a policy based on the use of force and claim the legitimacy of a threat to the territorial integrity, independence and sovereignty of another State. That reasoning cannot be accepted by the international community and should be rejected. Furthermore, whatever may be the claims of the Israeli authorities, it is the aspirations of the Lebanese people to sovereignty and full control of its internal affairs that are legitimate and based on principles of international law.

49. It is the invasion by Israel of Lebanon in June 1982 and its repeated acts of repression that initiated the circle of violence. The general policy of the Israeli authorities, supported by their strategic ally, the United States, can lead only to the deepening of the crisis and the intensification on a broader scale of the threat of conflagration in this very sensitive region.

50. The solution of the Lebanese problem lies in the speedy implementation of Council resolutions 508 (1982) and 509 (1982), in whose drafting and unanimous vote the delegation of Poland had the honour to participate in 1982 as a non-permanent member of the Council. Israel should be made to abide by its obligations under the fourth Geneva Convention and the norms of international law. The Israeli inhuman practices must be stopped and the Israeli forces must withdraw forthwith. The safety and security of the civilian population, including that of the Palestinian refugees, should be safeguarded.

51. There is another point to which my delegation wishes to draw the attention of the Council. This is the situation of UNIFIL. Speaking before the Council on 7 March [2370th meeting], the representative of Lebanon pointed out that Israel had no respect for UNIFIL, a Force which continues to be the agent of Security Council decisions. There were distressing reports of disrespect towards UNIFIL and obstruction of its carrying out its mandate.

52. Let me recall that since October 1973 Polish soldiers have been serving in the Middle East under the United Nation flag first in the United Nation Emergency Force and then, until this day in the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force. With their dedicated service, Poland is doing more than giving merely verbal support to the cause of peace in the region. Therefore, as a country deeply interested in strengthening United Nations peace-keeping functions in conformity with provisions of the Charter and decisions of the Council, Poland follows UNIFIL’s situation in southern Lebanon with concern. The proper conditions must be restored for UNIFIL to perform its present functions. Furthermore, we think that UNIFIL could play an even greater role in assisting the process of Israel's complete withdrawal and in safeguarding peace in the region in the future.

53. To conclude, my delegation wishes to add its voice to the voices of other delegations which have appealed to the Security Council to implement the provisions of its resolutions on Lebanon urgently and unanimously.

54. The PRESIDENT (interpretation from French): I should like to inform members of the Council that I have received a letter from the representative of Nigeria in which he requests to be invited to participate in the discussion of the item on the agenda. In conformity with the usual practice, I propose, with the consent of the Council, to invite him to participate in the discussion, without the right to vote, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Charter and rule 37 of the provisional rules of procedure.

At the invitation of the President, Mr. Garbs (Nigeria) took the place reserved for him at the side of the Council chamber.

55. The PRESIDENT (interpretation from French): I invite the representative of Nigeria to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

56. Mr. GARBA (Nigeria): On behalf of the Nigerian delegation, I wish first of all to join the delegations which have preceded ours in expressing our deepest condolences to the people and the Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics on the passing away of Mr. Konstantin Chernenko. General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and President of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet. Mr. Chernenko death is a loss not only to his great country but to the whole world. The world has indeed lost a great leader in the fight for peace and the struggle against imperialism and neo-colonialism. I should like to request my colleague, Mr. Troyanovsky, to convey the sympathy of the Nigerian delegation to the bereaved family and to the people and the Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

57. May I extend our heartiest welcome to you, Sir, on your assumption of the office of President for this month. We are delighted with your presidency at this particular time. We arc mindful of the importance of your position, and we are thus pleased with the circumstance of your steering these deliberations.

58. I would like also to place on record our deep appreciation of the stewardship of your immediate predecessor our respected colleague Mr. Krishnan of India.

59. My delegation has listened with interest to the statements on the important subject before the Council. We have also followed closely the events that have been unfolding in Lebanon over the past few years. We have carefully read the complaints of the representative of Lebanon contained in documents S/16974 and Add.1, S/16990 and S/16997. It is quite clear to us, as it should be to anyone who has followed the situation closely in that country, that the illegal occupation of parts of Lebanese territory by Israel has created a very dangerous situation inimical to peace and security in the entire area. The circumstances alone are repugnant, but even worse, the Israeli occupation armed forces have resorted to several practices and measures against the unarmed population in the areas under their occupation. These practices not only constitute a gross violation of the norms and principles of international law upon which the relationships between States are founded but in fact directly violate the provisions of the fourth Geneva Convention. 1/ This situation should not be allowed to continue.

60. It is also disturbing and sad to note that the crisis in Lebanon has continued in spite of the action of the Council in the past. On several occasions, the Council considered developments in Lebanon, especially those with serious implications for the international community, and adopted resolutions urging the parties to create conditions for peace and negotiations. The resolutions have gone unheeded, and quite unfortunately and regrettably, the Council itself has not been able to implement its own resolutions.
61. It will be recalled, for instance, that in 1978 the Council adopted resolution 425 (1978), which duly recognized the deteriorating situation in the region and its consequences for the maintenance of international peace and called for strict respect for the territorial integrity, sovereignty and political independence of Lebanon within its internationally recognized boundaries. It further called on Israel immediately to cease its military action against Lebanon and withdraw forthwith its forces from Lebanese territory.

62. Again, in 1982, the Council noted the continuing and unabated deterioration in the situation in Lebanon and adopted two resolutions: resolution 508 (1982) and resolution 509 (1982). There is no better testimony to the seriousness of the situation and the resolute commitment of the Council to arrest or repair an unacceptable situation.

63. In resolution 509 (1982), the Council demanded that Israel should withdraw, forthwith and unconditionally, all its military forces to the internationally recognized boundaries of Lebanon. That call was ignored, and the international community again stood by helplessly while national obduracy prevailed over international good offices and admonition.

64. We are unhappy and disturbed by the persistent hallmark of total disregard of the Council's resolutions in matters pertaining to the Middle East and Lebanon. The situation whereby resolutions are adopted but their provisions remain unimplemented and deliberately ignored can continue only with prospects of severe consequences for the role envisaged for the Security Council as the principal organ charged with the maintenance of international peace and security. In the present circumstances, it will not suffice for the Council merely to adopt another resolution condemning those practices and measures and demanding, as it has done on numerous occasions, that Israel withdraw to the internationally recognized boundaries. The Council must act to implement its resolutions, in particular resolutions 425 (1978), 508 (1982) and 509 (1982).

65. Nigeria for its part reaffirms its support for the efforts of the Government of Lebanon to extend its authority over all its territory and its determination to restore peace and order and to ensure the safety and security of its civilian population, including the Palestinian refugees in the various camps.

66. The PRESIDENT (interpretation from French): The next speaker is the representative of Saudi Arabia. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

67. Mr. SHIHABI (Saudi Arabia) (interpretation from Arabic): On behalf of the delegation of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, I express our sincere condolences on the death of President Chernenko to Mr. Troyanovsky and the Soviet Union delegation and, through them, to the bereaved family and the people and Government of the Soviet Union. The worldwide echo of the Soviet Union's great loss is evidence of the high esteem in which the President was held. The world has lost a great leader at a time when it needs his wisdom in the efforts and endeavours being made to solve complicated international problems.

68. Mr. President, in addressing the Council for the second time in two weeks, it gives me pleasure to reiterate the expression of my confidence that your wisdom and experience will lead us to the results that will give the Charier of the United Nations its due and satisfy the expectations of peoples which look to the United Nations to uphold their Charter-enshrined rights and to adopt a resolution that will express the message of truth on behalf of us all.

69. Representatives are all aware of what is now going on in Lebanon: Israeli troops of occupation and destruction have invaded Lebanon, an independent State and a Member of the United Nations. Israel, supported by an overwhelming war machine and a sense of immunity from punishment. attempted to take over all of Lebanon. But right was stronger than Israel and punishment awaited it. It is now leaving Lebanon, having been defeated in every objective except the criminal aim of killing the innocent and destroying the country.

70. The Israeli authorities, emboldened by all the military assistance and political support that they are getting, think they will be able to crush the will of peoples. But we know, and big Powers know very well from experience-a bitter experience in most cases – that a people defending its land, religion and honour, whether that land be Lebanon or Palestine, will never be defeated. This is now known to the Zionist war machine from experience, no matter how it or the Powers which support it try to ignore this basic human reality. The same fate that has befallen those who have pursued such a course awaits anyone who would follow in their path. It is inevitable that those who have justice on their side will be victorious, however long the road may be.

71. The Israeli authorities are challenging the essence of human nature and know that time is working against them. Throughout the last 38 years of battles, invasion campaigns, individual and collective attacks and crimes of every type and dimension, this reckless force has failed to subjugate peoples which reject this tyranny and cling to their rights to the end.

72. Although Hitler's Nazi war machinery set the pattern of collective and individual brutality and murder, the Israeli authorities have now surpassed him. And just like Hitler's, their end will be inevitable if the world does not stop them before it is too late.

73. What is the Israeli army of invasion doing on the soil of Lebanon, an independent country? What crimes it is committing: encircling villages, subjecting the people to the ugliest terrorist operations, attacking schools, holy places and medical clinics, kidnapping patients from hospitals-even from operating rooms, firing recklessly on the population-men, women, the elderly and children-using all the instruments of murder and destruction, from rifles and cluster bombs to tanks and aeroplanes.

74. Those crimes began against the Arab people of Palestine, and are continuing, with the same ugliness and criminality, against the Arab people of Lebanon. Rights arc being stolen and trampled upon in Lebanon. in Palestine and in the Golan. The invasions, crimes and excesses which are being brazenly committed day and night are well known to United Nations observers and are confirmed by all independent observers.

75. From previous speakers the Council has heard in sufficient detail about the crimes committed by the retreating Israeli army of invasion, which failed when confronted by the will of the Lebanese people. As members of the Council, we cannot fail to adopt a resolution in keeping with at least our minimum responsibilities under the Charter. The members of the Council bear a grave responsibility regarding global and regional peace and security, and an even graver responsibility regarding their commitment to the Charter and to the norms of international conduct. I must note that certain current attempts to make it difficult for the Council to adopt a resolution constitute a serious attempt to divert the Council from its most important basic responsibilities.

76. What, then, is Lebanon along with every unbiased and fair-minded person, asking of the Council? It is asking for a resolution in which the Council reaffirms its principles and upholds the Charter, in which it reinforces the stand it took in its resolutions 508 (1982) and 509 (1982). There is before the Council a draft resolution [S/17000) which represents the minimum that the Council can adopt in keeping with its level of international credibility. On behalf of my country, I express the hope that the Council will respond positively to the Lebanese complaint in accordance with the spirit and the letter of the Charter and I call on all Council members to fulfil their responsibility to adopt a resolution by which the Council can discharge its duty.

77. The Israeli authorities have completely ignored the Council's resolutions and continue to commit their crimes against the Palestinians, both in Palestine and in Lebanon, having driven them from their homeland in the first place, as well as against the Lebanese in Lebanon, whom they have tried to displace from their own homes. The failure to make Israel comply with resolutions 508 (1982) and 509 (1982) is one of the factors that have encouraged it to commit the crimes of which Lebanon is complaining now.

78. Among the absurdities put forward in this chamber in an attempt to justify the Israeli crimes was the talk about Lebanon's relations with its neighbours and about relations among the various factions of the Lebanese people itself. Is that Israel's concern? Is Israel Lebanon's guardian? Will Israel continue to fabricate pretexts for committing its expansionist crimes whenever it wants to, first in Palestine and then-who knows where?

79. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia supports Lebanon and supports the people of Lebanon. It supports the rights and territorial integrity of Lebanon, and it condemns in the fullest sense of that word the crime of the invasion of Lebanon. We condemn what Israel has perpetrated during its mad invasion and what, having failed, it is perpetrating during its retreat. We condemn the crimes committed by the Zionist forces, forces which were tyrannical because of their presence in Lebanon in the first place and which are now utterly tyrannical in their individual and collective attacks against a free people which is trying to secure the freedom of its country from the yoke of injustice, colonialism and oppression. The Zionist forces of invasion do not differentiate between women and children, young men and old men: they murder them all collectively.

80. Many members of the Council glorified acts of national resistance during invasions of their countries by foreign forces, and they must understand those who are dying in defence of their religion, their honour and their country against a terrorist invasion whose sole objective is domination and colonization.

81. If the Israeli authorities want peace and security for their people, the road they must follow is known and clearly marked. That road has already been demarcated by the Arabs and has been rejected by Israel. The road taken by the Israeli authorities, the road which they have been following since 1948, has not only increased their fears and vulnerability, but has heightened their sense of foreboding about an uncertain future, which is like the future of any criminal who is pursued by the law wherever he turns.

82. I am fully confident that the members of the Council will not hesitate once again to express what is right. I would add that the friends of the Israeli authorities could be of more service to them by telling them what is right than by pretending that what they are perpetrating is right while knowing full well that it is an evil which will turn against the perpetrator.

83. On behalf of my country, I express the hope that the Council will expedite the adoption of the draft resolution addressing the problems of Lebanon and constituting an important step in the process of dealing with the problems of the region as a whole. What constitutes a threat to Lebanon constitutes a threat to the security of the entire region. Arab security is a collective concept, and Arab rights are a total commitment. If the Council does not succeed in taking a position conforming to the provisions of the Charter, then it will not be Lebanon, or the Lebanese people, or the heroic inhabitants of southern Lebanon who will have failed: they are victors in any event, while Israeli methods will prove self-defeating and, in the long run, will turn against those who support them.

84. I have no doubt that we all appreciate the gravity of the issue before the Council and the importance of the Council's taking a correct stand that will enhance the credibility of the United Nations, impressing its respectability upon everyone.

85. The PRESIDENT (interpretation from French): The next speaker is the representative of Senegal. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

86. Mr. SARRE (Senegal) (interpretation from French): Yesterday, in this chamber, there was a very moving tribute to an illustrious Soviet leader. Mr. Konstantin Chernenko, President of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. His many qualities were described-above all, the initiatives he took in the context of detente among nations. I am sure that those initiatives will be pursued, to the benefit of the world and in keeping with the Charter of the United Nations. My delegation would ask Mr. Troyanovsky to be good enough to transmit the condolences of the Senegalese delegation on the occasion of this great loss.

87. Like many previous speakers, I should like, Sir, at the outset to extend to you my congratulations and best wishes for success in your term as President of the Council. You are the dean of the African diplomatic corps in New York-not because of your age but because of your lengthy service here. We know that your great experience, your diplomatic skills and the confidence you enjoy within the Organization provide the best guarantee of the success of our deliberations.

88. Your predecessor, Mr. Krishnan, the representative of India, also deserves a tribute for the authority and competence with which he led the Council's work in February.

89. As this is the first time that I have addressed the Council this year, I take this opportunity to congratulate all the countries that became members of the Council at the beginning of 1985. I wish also to thank members of the Council for having been good enough to allow me to participate in this debate.

90. The Council's present discussion, which began on 28 February [2568th meeting), demonstrates, if that were still necessary, the deep concern that the situation in Lebanon continues to evoke in the international community. A direct outgrowth of the wider conflict that has beset the Middle East for some four decades, the tragedy that the fraternal people of Lebanon are still experiencing has persisted for far too long. In this connection, the very clear and relevant statement to the Council on 28 February by the representative of Lebanon makes it unnecessary for us to revert in detail to the various aspects of Israel's conduct in occupied Lebanon.

91. We have said in previous statements before the Council, and we can never repeat enough, that the magnitude of the stakes involved in Lebanon requires that all the States Members of the Organization-particularly the members of the Security Council, and above all Israel-seriously commit themselves to enabling the Council to discharge its essential task: the promotion of peace and stability in a Lebanon which through our joint efforts shall have regained its identity. This brotherly country has the right to recover its territorial integrity so that it can continue to make its positive contribution to the attainment of the purposes of the Charter of the United Nations. This country which has always set an example of communal life, regardless of religious or ethnic considerations, should be given the necessary encouragement and assistance so that its example may be followed by others.

92. In this connection, we believe that the draft resolution now before the Council [S/17000] contains all the elements that could restore peace to Lebanon and enable it to regain its independence and its territorial integrity. By demanding that Israel put an end to its occupation of Lebanese territory and commit itself to full respect for the provisions of the Charier, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the fourth Geneva Convention, this draft resolution, if adopted, would be a decisive element for the restoration of peace in Lebanon and, above and beyond that, for the settlement of the wider problem of the Middle East, of which the Lebanese tragedy is only one aspect.

93. My country, Senegal, whose commitment and dedication to the cause of peace in the Middle East in general and in Lebanon in particular have never faltered-and eloquent testimony to this is provided by the recent joint communiqué issued at Cairo after the official visit by the Senegalese head of State, Mr. Abdou Diouf, to Egypt from 1 to 5 March-takes this opportunity to draw the international community's attention once again to the urgent need to redouble its efforts by taking a fresh look at the question of the Middle East.

94. As I have said, the present situation in Lebanon is but a reflection of a much wider situation-that is, the situation in the Middle East in all its aspects and in particular the Palestine question, to which a just and lasting solution must be found. As everyone knows, until an honourable solution to that question has been found, any initiative, no matter how praiseworthy, may well meet with failure. On the basis of that objective international fact, my delegation believes that the Council, because of its responsibilities and in the light of the appeals by the General Assembly, should undertake a study of the best ways and means for convening an international peace conference on the Middle East.

95. Because of the recent diplomatic developments in the region and the increase in the acts of violence in Lebanon itself, the international conscience must ensure that there is a new movement towards peace, for that is the only viable solution for all the States of the region. If there is increased political will, we have available now all the elements that should enable us to achieve, with honour and dignity and in an atmosphere of restored confidence, a just and there-fore lasting peace in the Middle Fast. We shall thereby make a great contribution, on the eve of the commemoration of the fortieth anniversary of the United Nations, to giving concrete form to the theme of that anniversary: "The United Nations for a better world".

96. The PRESIDENT (interpretation from French): The next speaker is the representative of Pakistan. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

97. Mr. Shah NAWAZ (Pakistan): I should like to begin my settlement by expressing our deep sympathy and profound condolences to Mr. Troyanovsky and the entire Soviet delegation and to the bereaved family on the passing away of Konstantin Chernenko, President of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. We share the grief and sorrow of the Government and the people of the Soviet Union at the loss of their great leader and outstanding statesman, whose absence from the international scene will be felt throughout the world.

98. Your assumption of the presidency of the Council for the month of March, Sir, is a source of great satisfaction to my delegation. The admirable manner in which you have guided the important deliberations of the Council during this very active month has won you our profound respect and testifies to your diplomatic skills and vast experience of international affairs. I am confident that your leadership will prove to be a great asset to the Council in carrying out its heavy responsibilities. I also wish to convey our sincere congratulations and pay a high tribute to Mr. Krishnan, of India, for the success with which he conducted the work of the Council last month.

99. Pakistan is deeply anguished by the intolerable situation prevailing in southern Lebanon, where the withdrawing Israeli troops are wreaking vengeance on the Lebanese civilian population and subjecting innocent men, women and children to indescribable acts of brutality. It is the innocent who suffer most from the terror unleashed in callous disregard of its consequences. In his statements of 28 February, 7 March and yesterday [2568th, 2570th and 2572nd meetings], as well as in the several communications he addressed to the Council, the representative of Lebanon has given details of the atrocities being committed by the Israeli troops in southern Lebanon. The desecration and destruction of Husseynjah Mosque in M’arakah, at a time at a time when it was filled with worshippers, caused the death of 16 and injuries to 45 innocent persons. This violent action reflects Israel's callous disregard for the sanctity of Islamic religious places in the occupied territories, Israeli repression is continuous and omnipresent. One wonders where this gory wave of so-called reprisals will end. Three days ago-on 9 March-a booby-trapped car exploded and killed 80 and wounded 200 people in a densely populated Beirut suburb. Only yesterday, Israeli troops sacked Zarariyah village and massacred its dwellers in cold blood.

100. The latest phase of violent Israeli actions in southern Lebanon is well chronicled in the international press. In the 7 March issue of me Times of London Robert Fisk, a celebrated observer of the Middle East scene, reported from Tyre that this Lebanese city had been turned into a place of terror and violence as a result of indiscriminate shootings, arrests, repeated curfews and house-to-house searches by the Israeli forces. Similar circumstances were reported from M'arakah, in the 8 March issue of The New York Times, by John Kifner, who managed to slip into southern Lebanon before it had been cordoned off by the Israeli army for foreign journalists. Giving an eyewitness account of the ruthless measures and practices adopted by the occupation troops in pursuit of the so-called iron-fist policy, Kifner reported growing resistance on the part of the local population against Israeli occupation. He observed that the anger and the increasing militancy of the population in southern Lebanon were entirely attributable to prolonged occupation and repressive measures by Israel.

101. Since the Israeli invasion of 1982, Lebanon has seen much bloodshed and violence and remains a dangerously inflamed area, threatening international peace and security. The continuation of the Israeli occupation has deepened the resentment of the local people and intensified resistance against it. The grim events of the past few days show that the chain of violence will not break as long as the Israeli presence lingers in southern Lebanon. Every new wave of terror will only serve to sow seeds of greater bitterness and hatred. Such violence will never succeed in breaking the spirit of the dauntless people of southern Lebanon, whose heroic sacrifices in the cause of freeing their homeland from Israeli occupation deserve our respect and admiration.

102. It is ironic that Israel should engage in terrorism in southern Lebanon at a time when many Arab leaders have taken initiatives reviving prospects of negotiations for peace in the Middle East. Israel has responded to these new initiatives not only by rejecting them out of hand but also by intensifying its repression in the lands it occupies. Israeli actions serve to diminish the hope that a negotiated peace settlement is achievable. Israel's refusal to provide a definitive time frame for its complete withdrawal from southern Lebanon has caused a deadlock in the Naqoura talks, making its pronouncement of withdrawals suspect and betraying a design on its part to maintain its strangle-hold over parts of Lebanese territory.

103. There is no denying the fact that the alternative to a negotiated settlement is an increasing spiral of violence and bloodshed in which the aggressor will not escape retribution and suffering. It is also clear that the indispensable condition for a negotiated settlement is a speedy Israeli withdrawal from the occupied territories. Israel has the choice of securing peace by returning the occupied territories to their lawful Arab and Palestinian owners. This is the basis of the latest Arab initiative for peace, embodied in the recent agreement reached between King Hussein of Jordan and Chairman Yasser Arafat of the PLO. The same condition is implicit in several Security Council resolutions, whether relating to Lebanon or to the Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967.

104. The campaign of tenor unleashed in southern Lebanon damages the credibility of the assumption that Israel could be made to terminate its occupation through a negotiated settlement. Israel has paid little heed to the repeated demands of the international community, including those of the Council, for the withdrawal of its troops from Lebanon. Its behaviour shows no sensitivity to world opinion or norms of international law. Hitherto the determined struggle of the Lebanese population alone has been responsible for frustrating Israel's expansionist ambitions, which were barely concealed at the time of its invasion.

105. In response to the complaint made by Lebanon, the least the Council can do is to remind Israel of the Council's demand for its immediate and unconditional withdrawal from Lebanese territory to the international border and strict compliance with the 1949 Geneva Conventions. The adoption of the draft resolution which has been presented by Lebanon [S/17000] would serve this purpose. It would also send a clear message to Israel of the illegality of its occupation of southern Lebanon and of the census of its repression by the international community. Obstruction of this draft resolution will not protect Israel from the rising militancy against its occupation, nor will it becalm the accompanying violence. It will only deal a blow to the current peace effort, which needs to be sustained by all those desirous of seeking a peaceful solution of the Middle East conflict.

106. I take this opportunity to express the solidarity of the Government and the people of Pakistan with the Government and the people of Lebanon in their struggle to free their country from foreign occupation, and to express also the confidence that their heroic struggle will be crowned with success.

107. The PRESIDENT (Interpretation from French): The next speaker is the representative of the Sudan. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

108. Mr. OMER (Sudan) (interpretation from Arabic): My delegation has learned with deep sorrow of the passing away of the Soviet leader, Konstantin Chernenko. General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. While sharing the sorrow of the members of the Soviet delegation at the passing away of Mr. Chernenko, we wish, through them, to convey our sincere condolences to the Soviet people on their great loss.

109. I wish at the outset to express my delegation's congratulations to you, Sir, on your assumption of the presidency for this month. Your well-known capability and skill will be of great help to the Council in discharging its serious and important tasks in the best possible manner.

110. I am pleased to express my appreciation to your predecessor, Mr. Krishnan, the representative of India, for his competence and efficiency in guiding the work of the Council last month.

111. I wish to thank the members of the Council for having allowed me to participate in the Council's discussion of an issue that is of importance to all States that cherish peace based on justice for all. This issue is of particular importance to my country and the other Arab countries, because it is directly linked to the rights of Lebanon, a fraternal Arab country. Since 1982, that country has been suffering from the consequences of the reckless Israeli invasion and from the continued aggressive occupation of a large portion of its national territory in utter disregard of the principles of the Charter of the United Nations, international law and the international conventions prohibiting the use of force against the territorial integrity and national independence of any State.

112. My delegation finds no more graphic and vivid picture of the inhuman Israeli practices against the civilian population in southern Lebanon, the western Bekaa and the Rashaya district than that contained in the statement of the representative of Lebanon at the outset of the Council's deliberations on this item [2568th meting]. He gave a detailed account of those violations, which include the siege and invasion of villages, the ransacking of houses, the detention of innocent people and the humiliation of the civilian population, to name but a few.

113. There is no doubt that all those practices constitute a flagrant violation of all international rules and conventions, in particular the fourth Geneva Convention. 1/ Furthermore, they constitute a continued violation of the sovereignty and independence of Lebanon. We do not believe that the Council and the international community need further explanation to be convinced. Israel's record in Lebanon and in the occupied Arab and Palestinian territories has been well-known to the world for more than 30 years.

114. We have heard the representative of Israel enumerating repeated pretexts in an attempt to defend indefensible practices. Israel, which is an occupying Power, has put itself voluntarily in a situation where it necessarily faces the natural reaction of a people whose land has been invaded and whose national sovereignty has been violated. The heroic struggle of the people of Lebanon is a holy duty that all peoples have taken up to combat aggression, invasion and the ensuing arbitrary and inhuman practices.

115. The inhuman Israeli practices against the civilian population in Lebanon, which have in recent days increased in their barbarism and ferocity, are not new. They are an issue to which this body and the international community cannot turn a deaf ear, if we want justice and right to prevail.

116. In view of what I have said, and in order to reaffirm the Council's authority in maintaining international peace and security and to compel Israel to respect the Charter and the principles of international law and the international conventions governing the conduct of States in times of war and peace, it is incumbent upon this body to live up to its duties enshrined in the Charter in order for it to put an end to Israel's persistent aggressive practices.

117. My delegation unreservedly supports Lebanon's legitimate demands which have been put before it by its representative when he called upon the Council to implement its previous resolutions concerning the full and unconditional withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanese territories, the immediate cessation of the Israeli practices against the civilian population of the region under Israeli occupation and the reaffirmation of strict respect for the independence, national sovereignty and territorial integrity of Lebanon.

118. We are confident that the Council will heed those legitimate demands and will take measures to protect the international principles that made this body the guardian of peace and security throughout the world.
119. The PRESIDENT (interpretation from French): The next speaker is the representative of Czechoslovakia. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

120. Mr. CESAR (Czechoslovakia): The Soviet people and all those who are aware of the value of peace have suffered a great loss in the death of the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and Chairman of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the Soviet Union, Konstantin Ustinovich Chernenko. Allow me to extend our profound condolences to the delegations of the Soviet Union, the Ukraine and Byelorussia. Konstantin Ustinovich Chernenko was an outstanding politician and statesman. The historic successes achieved by Soviet society are inseparably connected with his work. He consistently pursued the peace policy of the Soviet Union, striving for the reduction of international tension and for the establishment of confidence and understanding in relations among States. I wish to recall in this connection the words in which he called for the peaceful coexistence of States with different social systems:

"It is our opinion that it is imperative fully to use for these goals all available instruments, of course including the United Nations, which was founded for the very purpose of maintaining and strengthening peace."

121. Allow me to congratulate you, Sir, on the assumption of the presidency. As regards the activities of the Council, the month during which you are fulfilling the duties of this office has been very demanding from the beginning. I should like to express our conviction that your experience, professional abilities and political wisdom will be of great help to the Council in successfully achieving solutions to the serious and extraordinarily dangerous international political problems.

122. I also wish to express appreciation for the constructive and responsible work of Mr. Krishnan, the representative of India, as President of the Council during the month of February.

123. The Council is now considering yet another in a long series of complaints about the practices of Israel against the civilian population in the Arab territories occupied by that State. Attention is once again focused on Israel's illegal activities directed against the inhabitants of southern Lebanon, the western Bekaa and the Rashaya district.

124. Statements that have been heard here have contained facts testifying to the increase in scope and degree of the dangerousness of the violence perpetrated by Israel against the Lebanese population since the beginning of the illegal occupation of Lebanon. The ever-growing toll of human lives gives an extraordinarily strong warning signal to the United Nations, and primarily to the Security Council.

125. The Czechoslovak people, which follows with concern the destiny of the people of Lebanon, on 7 March issued, through their Committee of Solidarity, a statement on the latest developments in Lebanon, resolutely condemning the racialist practices of the Zionist circles of Israel used by the occupying troops against the Arab population in southern Lebanon. The statement also condemns the Israeli Government for its prospectless policy of brutal violence and attacks against the population of the territories occupied during the barbaric aggression against Lebanon in 1982. The Czechoslovak people also expressed their admiration for the extensive and successful movement of resistance of the Arab people against the aggressor.

126. The developments in southern Lebanon require that the international community adopt effective measures which would provide for the speedy liberation of Lebanon and the restoration of its State sovereignty and territorial integrity. In the United Nations, an end should be put to the cynical and malicious demagoguery of the representatives of Israel, whose Government is responsible for, among other things, the atrocious massacres at Sabra and Shatila, the murder and torture of the population in the south of Lebanon and other flagrant violations of the fundamental rights of the population of southern Lebanon. Nor should the attacks of the Israeli soldiery on the United Nations units sent to Lebanon on a peace-keeping mission and the depreciation of the authority of the United Nations and its agencies be allowed to take place with impunity.

127. It is necessary that each State member of the Security Council be guided in the search for suitable measures by the fact that Israelis an aggressor within the terms of the Definition of Aggression of 14 December 1974 [General Assembly resolution 3314 (XX1X), annex] and that it flagrantly violates the norms of international law, including the fourth Geneva Convention' and, primarily, the Charter of the United Nations. It must be recognized that such a state of affairs poses a threat not only to Lebanon but also to peace and security in the Middle East and all over the world. To turn aside from the struggle against this aggressiveness and hostility, or even to support it, would be to take the side of injustice.

128. I should like in this connection to recall the unfortunate consequences, so well known to all of us, of the failure of the Council to adopt the humanitarian measures requested by Lebanon a half-year ago [2556th meeting]. We all upon the representative of the United States this time to take the side of the just cause, not that of gross unlawfulness, and not to stand in opposition to the other members of the Council and the desires of all peace-loving forces.

129. We resolutely demand that the Government of Israel, a State Member of the Organization, refrain from acts of State terrorism and violations of the duties of an occupying Power as stipulated in the fourth Geneva Convention, that it responsibly co-operate with the Lebanese Government in the organization of the withdrawal of the occupying forces and give up right now speculations about future interference in the internal affairs of Lebanon.

130. We appreciate the fact that the statement of the representative of Lebanon contained an unambiguous expression of willingness to engage in constructive co-operation with Israel in the organization of the evacuation of the Israeli troops. Such an approach constitutes the only way to achieve the much needed implementation of Security Council resolutions 508 (1982) and 509 (1982), which demand that Israel immediately and unconditionally bring its armed forces back across the internationally recognized boundaries of Lebanon. This is the only way for termination of the illegal occupation of Lebanon.

131. The PRESIDENT (interpretation from French): The next speaker is the representative of Israel. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

132. Mr. NETANYAHU (Israel): For students of the international situation, one might even say of the human condition, this has been a most instructive session. A number of speakers have outdone each other in anti-Israeli rhetoric for our alleged misdeeds in south Lebanon.

133. We have heard, for example, from the representative of South Yemen. I suppose it was probably too much to hope that the representative of that amiable regime at Aden, a haven and training-ground for terrorists from a dozen countries, would refrain from speaking.

134. We have heard from the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, which, while denouncing us, at least spared us a lecture on the need to respect the independence of nations.

135. Then there was Cuba, that island of tranquility, whose troops are now busily minding their own business in East and West Africa-not to mention their well-armed emissaries of goodwill in this hemisphere.

136. And then we heard from Viet Nam, a country that occupied Cambodia with 200,000 troops and Laos with 50,000, and is currently crushing both countries underfoot. It chose to lecture Israel about the evils of occupation.

137. And then there is Nicaragua, whose benevolent campaign against the defenceless Mosquito Indians no doubt qualifies it to talk of atrocities.

138. And then there is East Germany, whose soldiers are obediently goose-stepping to the Soviet tune in foreign climes. The representative of that totalitarian regime dares to invoke public opinion.

139. What have these paragons of international virtue been telling us? Their repeated message is this: Israel has no light to defend itself, even when withdrawing from Lebanon. It should not defend its soldiers, it should not defend its civilians. When ambushed and bombed, it is to do nothing. It is not permitted to track terrorists back to their lairs. It is not even permitted to prevent car bombs from crossing the border and blowing up women and children.

140. For just two day ago, the Islamic-Jihad of Lebanon, a front group for various extremist Shiite organizations, made an announcement. They said that the car bomb used against an Israeli convoy-a convoy, mind you, leaving Lebanon-was actually intended for use against the Israeli town of Metulla, a few hundred yards across the border.

141. These people have made it clear that their ultimate targets, besides Lebanese from other groups, are the men, women and children of Israel. If the declared intention to use car bombs against civilians is not terrorism, then nothing is.

142. We will never accept the principle that we cannot defend ourselves against such attacks. We will continue to track our attackers back to their havens, confiscate their weapons and thwart their plans to murder us.

143. This was exactly our action yesterday in Zarariyah. What we heard from the representative of Lebanon about that action was flatly, completely false. This village was the target neither of a reprisal nor of a random sweep-precisely the opposite. The Israel Defence Forces had received reliable intelligence that a large group of armed terrorists was preparing to launch further attacks against us from that village. This, incidentally, corroborated other information that traced to that village many recent attacks.

144. Indeed, when our forces entered Zarariyah they were met with a hail of gunfire and even RPG rockets. They responded with fire and pursued several dozen fleeing terrorists, some of whom were in vehicles loaded with weapons and explosives. In the ensuing battle, over 30 terrorists were killed and several dozen were captured. Seven were wounded and treated by Israeli medics-not exactly fitting, to put it mildly, the colourful language of atrocity used so glibly by some speakers yesterday.

145. In addition, we uncovered an enormous amount of weapons, explosives and mine-caches unusually large even for southern Lebanon. So much for an attack on a "peaceful and defenceless" village.

146. This is a good illustration of the way in which Israel's actions against its attackers are exaggerated and distorted beyond belief. I do not have the time here to rebut the whole stream of falsehoods that have been uttered in the course of this debate. But, beyond mere distortion, there is outright fabrication. Groups in Lebanon have been killing each other with abandon for many years now. This does not prevent them, or others, from falsely accusing us of their mutual atrocities.

147. I mentioned earlier in this debate the preposterous accusation that we were responsible for the bomb at M'arakah. Let me take a moment to address an even more ludicrous charge. A few days ago a bomb went off outside a mosque at Beirut, as such bombs have been doing for the last decade. Israel and the United States were immediately accused, without the slightest evidence, of setting it off.

148. But we do know, for example, that Sheikh Fadlallah, a major Shiite leader affiliated with Iran, was summoned to Damascus recently. He was apparently told to stop agitating for a Khomeini-style Islamic republic in Lebanon, which is not exactly agreeable to the present regime in Damascus. But Fadlallah ignored Syria's demands. A few days ago a car bomb exploded next to the Mosque, just yards away from his home, wounding some of his bodyguards. Now, no one here has even bothered to mention the most likely perpetrator of that bombing-Syria, which having imported into Lebanon the Khomeini fanatics, now worries that it will lose control over them.

149. So it makes no difference whether Israel's forces are in the area, have recently left the area, or are far away from an area of Lebanon. Whatever happens, no matter where it happens, Israel, it seems, is going to be accused.

150. While the various Lebanese factions-and, behind them, Damascus and Teheran-can agree on nothing else, they all lend their voices to a harmony of hate against Israel. And Beirut, which is vassalized by Syria and frightened by Iran's surrogates, has decided to join this chorus. It repeats the false accusations against Israel and brings them even to this chamber.

151. By now no one expects heroic defiance of Syria from Beirut. But it might at least refrain from outbidding others in inciting fanaticism and terrorism. The Government of Lebanon will soon face the domestic consequences of fanning such extremism.

152. As for attacks on Israel and its citizens, we shall hold Lebanon responsible for failing to live up to its international obligations, the obligations of that very sovereignty which it so noisily invoked yesterday.

153. What would the adoption of this draft resolution [S/17000) do? First let me tell you what it would not do: it would not stop Israel from defending its men, women and children against attack. But what it would do is to encourage the forces of fanaticism and extremism in southern Lebanon. It would cost lives, including those of Lebanese-lives lost to an emboldened terrorism. And it would be a truly historic surrender to blackmail by members of the Security Council. So those who are really concerned with peace must not take part in this exercise. It can only embolden the men of terror in Lebanon.

154. But, of course, most of those who support this draft resolution deliberately seek precisely that outcome. A few, for their own reasons, mistakenly joined them. They, too, will share in the responsibility for what happens as a result.

155. So what we have here is not a campaign to keep Lebanon free or fairly apportion blame. What we have seen here is another chapter in the campaign to make Lebanon, the Middle East-indeed, the world-safe for hypocrisy.

156. The PRESIDENT (interpretation from French): The representative of the Syrian Arab Republic has asked to speak. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

157. Mr. EL-FATTAL (Syrian Arab Republic) (interpretation from Arabic): I had not intended to take part in this debate, and should not have sought to do so but for the fact that the Israeli representative intervened in order to mislead members of the Council and to insult those who have here defended Lebanon and the right of the Lebanese people to defend itself.

158. Allow me, Mr. President, to express to the Soviet delegation our sorrow and grief on the passing away of Mr. Konstantin Chernenko, General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and President of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the Soviet Union. We knew Comrade Chernenko as a faithful leader and supporter of peoples’ liberation movements and as a prominent statesman. He contributed to fostering friendly relations between our countries in various fields. We knew him as a fighter for socialism and for the liberation of countries, and we hail his services to his country, his Government, the 1917 Revolution and the alliance of all peoples against imperialism, colonialism and aggression.

159. Allow me, Sir, to express to you at the outset our appreciation for your assumption of the presidency for this month. We are confident that your long experience in diplomacy here at the United Nations, in addition to your country's constructive role in international affairs, will help the Council to do justice to the suffering peoples of many countries, in the first place the Arab peoples in Lebanon, Palestine and the occupied Arab territories, as well as the African peoples of southern Africa.

160. On this occasion we should like to express our sincere congratulations to the representative of India on his presidency of the Council in February and on the exemplary manner of energy, wisdom and objectivity with which he guided the Council's work during that month.

161. I wish to make some preliminary remarks on the subject of this debate. The statements of the Israeli representative and of a permanent member of the Council have compelled us once more to intervene out of concern that the Council act justly as the body bearing responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security. This Council is the first resort of those countries whose independence and territorial integrity are threatened. In accordance with its mandate, the Council can employ the machinery of collective security as a means of removing any act of aggression or threat of force. It is on that basis that we, and other States, have resorted to the protection of the Security Council, because of our acceptance, since the signing of the Charter of the United Nations, that it was the Council that was to limit the use of force, through measures adopted by the Council. Unfortunately, it has failed to carry out its duties and responsibilities. This has led to the perpetuation of situations totally inimical to the Charter, in particular situations threatening the maintenance of international peace and security, the termination of aggression and the exercise by peoples of their right to self-determination. Thus the Council has failed to carry out the aims of the Charter and has become but a place in which to present complaints and nothing more-an arena for manoeuvres in which the weak are the losers. Instead of doing justice to the victims, the Security Council fosters faits accomplis resulting from aggression.

162. The question of Palestine. which has been discussed since 1948, proves what I have just said, because Israel and its allies, primarily the United States, have succeeded, through the exploitation of the Council, in rewarding the aggressor and undermining peoples' right to self-determination and brilliantly-I repeat, brilliantly-tipped the scale in favour of the aggressor. Thus the right to resist is the natural and only proper means open to peoples in the circumstances prevailing in the Council; the ideal means to put an end to aggression and to regain usurped rights. According to the pertinent principles of international law and under Article 51 of the Charter, this is the right of peoples.

163. We hope that this time the United States will not hamper the work of the Council and that it will co-operate with all the members that have spoken here out of their concern for international peace and security.

164. The magnificent struggle waged and the sacrifices endured by the heroic Lebanese people are the direct result of the fact that the United States has not enabled the Security Council to implement its resolutions 508 (1982) and 509 (1982), for if the United States had been faithful to its declared intentions when it voted in favour of those resolutions, the Council would have been able to implement them immediately and unconditionally. But it has become clear that the United States vote in favour of both resolutions, and in particular resolution 509 (1982), was misleading and was aimed only at gaining time to help Israel in blackmailing Lebanon in the attempt to obliterate its identity and place it at the service of Israel's ambitions in the region.

165. But the Lebanese people has risen against the 17 May 1983 accord, concluded under military pressure, and caused it to be abrogated. Even now Washington is seeking gains for Israel, as it did in the last meeting. Israel's refusal to submit a plan and a timetable for its withdrawal during the Naqoura talks-talks which the United States Administration pretended to support-was but a means to gain time and ultimately to create conditions in and outside Lebanon that, according to its miscalculations, could somehow exact a pound of flesh from Lebanon. Since the last meeting of the Security Council, Israel has expanded its inhuman terrorist practices against civilians in southern Lebanon as well as in Beirut itself, as opposed to what the representative of Israel said just a few minutes ago. There have been hundreds of casualties as a result of those incidents, all of which are meant to hamper the efforts of the Lebanese factions that seek to restore stability and security in the north, south, east and west of Lebanon.

166. Israel is interested only in undermining those efforts and in diverting attention from its defeat in its war against Lebanon. It is in Israel's interest to impede Lebanese endeavours to reconstruct its security, economy and society. Israel is reacting to its military and political defeat through operations that aim at aggravating the situation, but we are certain that it will not succeed in its purpose because the Lebanon of 1985 is not the Lebanon of 1975. The Lebanon of 1985 is the Lebanon of conciliation; it is the Lebanon of solidarity against the common enemy, which is Israel. The recent participation of the Lebanese army in resisting the barbaric operations against civilians in southern Lebanon clearly reflects the change in the quality of the national resistance aimed at the unconditional evacuation of Israeli troops.

167. Despite all this, the representative of Israel today tried, as he has tried in the past on more than one occasion, to give the impression that the Syrian presence in Lebanon is a kind of occupation imposed upon Lebanon. But the Israeli representative, the United States and every country in the world recognize that the Syrian presence in Lebanon came about at the request of the legitimate Lebanese authority to help it achieve its noble aims, primarily that of maintaining Lebanon's territorial integrity, security and stability. The Syrian-Lebanese co-operation in the rescue process, in conciliation and in the implementation of the security plan, which today covers most of Lebanese territory, is under way with the consent of all Lebanese parties.

168. The Israeli representative alleged at the last meeting that, despite all this, Syria occupies 60 percent of Lebanese territory. If Israel's statements deceive some, the Lebanese know who is the true enemy and which Arab country is first to do its utmost to restore security and stability through a constructive and fruitful dialogue and concrete actions to help it. The Israeli representative knows that truth, which is painful to him. If he does not know that truth, it is because political illiteracy is prevalent in the imported Zionist entity. That entity has been provided by the United States with all kinds of respiratory machinery to keep its blood circulation going.

169. The United States delegation is fervently trying to abort the draft resolution contained in document S/17000, which is in conformity with and along the same lines as resolution 208 (1982) and 509 (1982), which were adopted unanimously. I hope that I am wrong in my analysis. I sincerely hope that the United States will not exercise its right of veto against this humanitarian draft resolution.

170. Those efforts are being made at a time when Israel implements with unlimited ferocity-stemming from its inherent aggressive instincts as a colonial entity-its barbaric policies against the civilian population which have been described by Rabin, the Defence Minister, as the "iron fist" policy. These have been accompanied by the United States applying pressure through "heavy handed" policies legalized by United States jurisdiction that have been a principle of United States relations with independent countries.

171. The United States rides roughshod over its responsibilities under the Charter as a permanent member of the Council. It now imposes individual sanctions against any entity in the world which does not support American positions, whether in the United Nations or in the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries. At the same time, we are aware that the United States-as is its practice-obstructs any attempt to impose collective sanctions against the apartheid regime in accordance with the provisions of the Charter, despite universal support of that step to protect millions of black Africans against slavery, detention, arrests, the creation of bantustans and forced exile, imposed on them by the minority regime of Pretoria.

172. At the 2570th meeting, we listened to the representative of the United States say that, according to sources in Beirut, there are threats "specifically linked to our actions in the Security Council . . . to influence the participation and vote of the United States in this body" and that "the United States therefore calls on all members of the Council to repudiate the threats against the deliberative process of the Council".

173. All these allegations, true or false, have nothing to do with the crux of the Lebanese complaint which is before us. They are aimed at giving the impression that the Council is under coercion while discussing Lebanon's complaint. But we all know that the Council adopted very important resolutions while the Zionist leaders here in the United States-American nationals-with the participation of the United States, have been exerting all kinds of pressure and threats to deny the Palestinian people its unity, independence and international identity which were recognized under the British Mandate.

174. If we believe the American argument that coercion is exerted in the Council, then resolution 69 (1949), in which the Council described Israel as a peace-loving State, was wrested by coercion, in as much as it had been preceded by Israeli massacres against the Palestinian civilian population and by the assassination of United Nations Mediator Count Folke Bernadotte and his French assistant. Was not the attack against the spy ship Liberty and the killing of hundreds of Americans an Israeli intimidation of the United States while the Security Council met day and night to achieve a cease-fire in that year?

175. If we accept that United States "logic", does it not mean that the Council has considered the question of Nicaragua under pressure of the United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), which is operating in Nicaraguan territory to topple the legitimate Government and rob the Sandinist revolution of its national gains? Does all that not mean that the economic intimidation practised by the United States Administration against corm States which face food shortages will prevent those countries from turning to the Security Council for fear of the American threat to discontinue food aid?

176. Let us be frank: the American statement was intended to justify possible American opposition-which we hope will not materialize-to a humanitarian draft resolution and to label as heroic a position inconsistent with the humanitarian principles called for by the Washington Administration. It is also a pretext to move its fleets in the Mediterranean from west to east.
177. I should like to add that those who suffer from continued threat and intimidation live temporarily in New York in the service of their country, not the other way round.

178. As usual, the representative of the Zionist entity has tried to mislead the Council. He said that the Israeli Army is withdrawing from Lebanon, not entering Lebanon, and that that Army therefore has the right to defend itself using all means. But the representative of Israel ignores the fact that the occupation itself is an act of aggression and that the resistance is thus exercising its natural right of driving the invaders out, whether they are withdrawing from or storming the country. The European resistance to the Nazis fought the invaders, whether they were coming into or leaving their countries. The criterion is the foreign presence on Lebanese territory, not the intentions of the Israeli strategies and tactics.

179. The Israeli representative forgot that the Lebanese resistance to the Israeli invaders did not start with the withdrawal of the invasion; its seeds were sown on the first day of Israel's sweep across Lebanon, on 6 June 1982.

180. The Israeli Prime Minister stated, through the Hebrew-language radio service in its news broadcast of 26 February 1985, that:

"The withdrawal will be decided upon according to various factors, among them the establishment of a security zone in the north, the protection of troops of the Israel Defence Forces and the battle against the terrorism of the Shiites."

181. Can any Council member see in this withdrawal anything but the building of a road on which Israel will return to Lebanon?

182. According to what we have read out, the Israeli withdrawal is being carried out on conditions set by Israel alone, in keeping with its aggressive intentions. The populations of the occupied territories, the target of the inhuman practices of the Israeli forces, know very well that Israel is strengthening its strongholds and positions in southern Lebanon. Israel, therefore, cannot expect the resistance to cease just because it has declared its intention to withdraw. it is impossible to believe that this withdrawal could not be carried out without the inhuman tires perpetrated by Israel: the laying siege to villages, the killing of children, women and the elderly, the blowing up of places of worship and social institutions, deportation, the
demolition of dwellings, and inspections which have been extended to every house, every hut.

183. By the terms of the fourth Geneva Convention, the demolition of houses, the besieging of towns, the torture of civilians, and the inhuman and uncivilized treatment meted out to the villagers and other inhabitants are war crimes. The representative of Israel has attempted to mislead the Council by invoking the concept of self-defence, trying to interpret that term in a way which contradicts its true meaning. For Israel, the right of self-defence has come to mean the right to wage pre-emptive wars, breaking into houses, killing, displacement, and terrorist practices against civilians. It means deploying even more troops on the occupied Lebanese territory. Does self-defence require perpetrating horrible crimes such as that committed on a mosque situated on the outskirts of Beirut, claiming more than 80 civilian lives? The Israeli concept of sell-defence permits retaliation, as explained by Shamir, the Israeli For­eign Minister, quoted in the newspaper Le Monde and on French radio on 20 February 1985 as follows:

"We are absolutely determined to teach them that Israel will put an end to their activities by every possible means, including means we have hitherto not used." *

184. Does that statement mean that the blowing up of the mosque in Beirut and the events of yesterday and the day before in southern Lebanon have been carried out through means not before used by Israel? We know that such means as the demolition of houses of worship, including the mosque in Beirut, and the killing of civilians have been traditionally employed by Israel since its inception, out of hatred for the Arabs and everything that is Arabic.

185. There is another statement by Shamir I should not like to see reproduced in the records of this Council, for it contains an attack against a State which is a permanent member of the Council. Syria cannot put on record those dirty words uttered by Shamir and reported by French radio in Paris.

186. I apologize for taking up so much of the Council's time; I know that the hour is late. The aim of this statement is to dot the i's.
There have been manoeuvres here to mislead the Council, and I wish to reaffirm Syria's support for the people and the Government of Lebanon and to state that we shall continue to support Lebanon until it regains its strength, to enable that country to live in peace within its internationally recognized boundaries.

187. Mr. BASSOLE (Burkina Faso) (interpretation from French): We were shocked to Team yesterday morning the sad news of the death of Konstantin Chernenko, President of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR and General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, His death comes at a time when international peace and security-the peace and security to which he dedicated his life-are more than ever threatened. In recent weeks, this has been borne out by the armed conflicts which are under way in various regions of the world, compelling our Council to meet almost cease­lessly. As the leader of a great Power, the deceased bore a special responsibility for the future of mankind. On behalf of the National Revolutionary Council and of the Government and the people of Burkina Faso, I express to the Soviet delegation our heartfelt condolences, and request the Soviet delegation to convey them to its Government and to the family of the deceased.

188. My delegation wishes to speak at this stage of our deliberations for the following reason. In her statement before the Council [2570th meeting], the representative of the United States drew the attention of us all to a fact whose importance and gravity have not escaped us. This uncomfortable situation in which a State Member of the Organization-indeed, a member of the Security Council-finds itself because of the opinions it holds should be of concern to the Council, first, because we firmly believe that matters before the Council should be debated with no pressure brought to bear from any quarter on any member. Further we believe that in all matters the Council should show moderation and avoid extremism, lest it become more and more difficult for the Council to put an end, through adequate and universally acceptable solutions, to hotbeds of tension throughout the world. Finally, we believe in the virtues of persuasion by force of argument. Our word% should in no way cast doubt on or call into question our commitment to defend the just cause of the fraternal people of Lebanon. We merely felt that it would be appropriate and useful to share these ideas with the other members of the Council along with our concern about our chances of finding solutions to problems which are made thornier by certain activities.

189. The PRESIDENT (interpretation from French): There are no other names on the list of speakers. I now have the intention to put to the vote the draft resolution in document S/17000.

190. I shall first call on those members of the Council who wish to make statements before the voting.

191. Mr. MOHAMMED (Trinidad and Tobago): First, I should like on behalf of the Government and people of Trinidad and Tobago to convey our deepest sympathy and condolences to the Government and people of the Soviet Union on the untimely death of Konstantin Chernenko, General Secretary d the Central Committee d the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and President of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet. Our condolences go also to the bereaved family.

192. We have been following the recent tragic events in Lebanon with utmost concern. We welcome the decision by the Government of Israel to withdraw all its forces from Lebanon to the internationally recognized boundaries. We have also noted that the Israeli Government has approved the second phase of its withdrawal. We are, however, very concerned by reports d the increased violence accompanying its withdrawal-reports d the death of innocent civilians, imposition of restrictions, imprisonment, human degradation and general devastation. The Government of Trinidad and Tobago cannot condone either the earlier violations of the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Lebanon or the more recently reported violations of the people and their land.

193. I turn now to the draft resolution before the Council. My delegation would have liked to we one or two more constructive, one or two more forward-looking, elements incorporated in the draft resolution. For example, we should have liked to we an appeal made to all parties involved to exercise restraint during the process of withdrawal, an appeal made to all parties to retrain from the use of violence, as in our view this would facilitate and expedite the process of withdrawal. And we should have liked to see an appeal made to all parties to demonstrate some mutual forbearance.

194. We feel that both Israel and Lebanon could usefully engage in consultations and discussions aimed at working out the modalities that would ensure a peaceful withdrawal. We feel that these consultations might also provide a forum and an opportunity to draw up a programme and timetable for the total and complete withdrawal. We feel that such consultations might yield insights into the subsequent requirements for the maintenance of law and order in the evacuated areas. Such consultations might also indicate possibilities for an enhanced role for United Nations peace-keeping operations.

195. My delegation will vote in favour of the draft resolution before the Council, but we should like to place it on record that we have interpreted the purport of the draft resolution in the manner I have just outlined. We are also appealing to both Israel and Lebanon to pay due regard to our suggestions.

196. Mrs. KIRKPATRICK (United States of America): On behalf of the United States delegation and of the United States in its role as host Government to the United Nations, I should like to convey to the Soviet delegation the sincere condolences of my Government on the occasion of the death of the Chairman of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics Konstantin Ustinovich Chernenko. We should also like our condolences to be extended to his family.

197. At a time when representatives of our two Governments are about to begin discussions in Geneva on ways to reduce and finally eliminate the danger of nuclear war, this solemn occasion reminds us of the grave responsibilities which we bear for the maintenance and strengthening of world peace. The decision of the Soviet and United States delegations in Geneva to begin their discussions on schedule despite the passing of Chairman Chernenko demonstrates, I think, the commitment of both our countries to this process.

198. I should also like to extend the condolences of the United States delegation and of the United States in its role as host country to the family and the Government of Prime Minister Tom Adams of Barbados, who has died only today. Prime Minister Adams gave distinguished, courageous and democratic leadership to Barbados, and we greatly regret his loss.

199. The United States regrets that it is confronted here in the Council with a draft resolution which it cannot support. My country is in fact deeply committed to peace for the people of Lebanon and sovereignty for the Government of Lebanon. The United States would greatly prefer to join in a consensus resolution which commits this body to a sincere effort to deal with the problems of Lebanon, while respecting the rights of all States Members of the United Nations. We should have been happy to join in negotiations to the end of achieving such a consensus resolution and, in a spirit of good faith and goodwill, to have worked to find a formulation that addresses the needs of Lebanon and the possibilities for peace.

200. Indeed, the United States is still ready to join in a statement that reflects the dismay of the Council at the escalation of violence in Lebanon; expresses our deepest sympathy to the victims of that violence; urges restraint on all parties; calls on all parties to implement the recommendations contained in the Secretary-General's report; affirms the application of the fourth Geneva Convention to the occupied areas of Lebanon; reaffirms our commitment and that of all members to the full restoration of Lebanon's sovereignty, independence, territorial integrity and unity. We also should be happy to join in an action by the Council which took some account of the threats of violence aimed at these deliberative processes.

201. Unfortunately, the Government of Lebanon was uninterested in an approach which would have had the support of all members of the Council and, instead, came to the Council with a draft resolution it declined to modify in any way. We regret that the Government of Lebanon declined to discuss the text. We regret that the Government of Lebanon presented an unbalanced draft resolution in the first place.

202. The United States Government has worked long and hard and very sincerely to assist in securing the withdrawal of all foreign forces from Lebanon. We support the Secretary-General's report. We support the Nagoura talks for an orderly withdrawal of Israeli forces.

203. The United States Government worked hard and in good faith to create conditions that would restore full sovereignty to the Government of Lebanon and the control of all of Lebanon's territory to the people of Lebanon. Our efforts, alas, have met with no success so far. The tragic cycle of violence in Lebanon continues. Peace has not been brought to Lebanon because too many parties in and around Lebanon have preferred conquest to peace. Foreign troop and foreign groups are still in Lebanon and join warring indigenous factions in drenching that tragic land in blood. There is a cycle of violence in Lebanon, and that fact is not altered by its denial in the Council.

204. The United States believes that this draft resolution does not accord Israel fair treatment. We believe this debate has not accorded Israel fair treatment. We believe it has not respected the realities of Lebanon. We are disturbed that the lack of fairness apparently does not embarrass many members of the Council. The fact is, Members of the United Nations have a habit, in the Council, of accusing Israel of the most extraordinary crimes. It has not been very long since a long list of speakers accused the Government of Israel of poisoning thousands of Arab schoolgirls, but investigation by international health authorities found no evidence of that poisoning. On another occasion, the Government of Israel was accused of wanton murder of refugees in Ein el-Hilweh, but objective investigation established that no murder had taken place. I cite these examples, not to exculpate Israel of any wrong-doing, but to point to the profound and persistent hostility to Israel which is repeatedly manifested in the Council. That hostility, which singles out the State of Israel, is manifest even when the Council confronts violence done to Israel. That hostility, unfortunately, leads, I believe, to unbalanced decisions - unbalanced resolutions.

205. The draft resolution before us today is, I think, such an unbalanced draft resolution. We believe that it applies double standards; indeed, we believe that double standards have dominated the deliberations, as we believe that "double-speak" was the lingua franca of much of this debate. We note that the representative of Viet Nam, whose 200,000 troops wreak war on the people of Cambodia, is concerned about the presence of foreign troops in Lebanon. We note that Cuba, which has foreign troops stationed in a dozen countries in the world, is concerned about the violation of the sovereignty of Lebanon. We note that the PLO condemns violence here-Israeli violence, of course. We note that it was Syria which assured us of how happy Lebanon is to have Syrian troops in Lebanon.

206. The United States supports-ardently supports-the withdrawal of all Israeli troops from Lebanon. We have worked to that end; we will do so in the future. The United States sincerely supported resolutions 508 (1982) and 509 (1982), and we sincerely supported, then and now, the withdrawal of all foreign troops from Lebanon and the enjoyment of full sovereignty by Lebanon. The United States opposed Israel's entering Lebanon in the beginning. We fully support the applicability to Lebanon's occupied territories of the fourth Geneva Convention. 1/

207. But we cannot acquiesce in this draft resolution because we do not believe an unbalanced resolution will end the agony of Lebanon. The United States believes it is not too late for the Council to reaffirm its commitment to peace in Lebanon. We believe it is not too late for the Council to engage in a serious search for constructive means to that end. In the meanwhile, the United States will vote against the draft resolution.

208. The PRESIDENT (Interpretation from French): I shall now put to the vote the draft resolution contained in document S/17000.

A vote was taken by show of hands.

In favour: Burkina Faso, China. Egypt, France. India, Madagascar, Peru, Thailand. Trinidad and Tobago. Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic. Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

Against: United States of America.

Abstaining: Australia, Denmark, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

The result of the vote was 11 in favour, one against and 3 abstentions. The draft resolution was not adopted, the negative vote being that of a permanent member of the Council.

209. Mr. MAXEY (United Kingdom): I wish first to convey to our Soviet colleagues, to their Government, to the family and to the people of the USSR my delegation's sincere condolences on the death of Mr. Konstantin Chernenko, the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and President of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet.
210. In my speech to the Council last Thursday [2570th meeting], 1 emphasized the need for the Council to promote a diplomatic solution to the growing violence in southern Lebanon and to do nothing which could further inflame that violence. This approach has been a guiding factor in our attitude to the draft resolution.

211. Before turning to the details of the draft, I should like to associate my delegation with those who have stressed the unacceptability of threats to United Nations personnel. This is a matter of great significance to the United Nations as a whole and cannot be passed over in silence.

212. There are a number of elements in the draft resolution which we support, in particular its operative paragraphs 2, 3, 4 and 7. We strongly support the Council’s calls for the complete withdrawal of all Israeli forces from Lebanon and for strict respect for the sovereignty, independence, unity and territorial integrity of Lebanon within its internationally recognized boundaries. We consider that Israel, as the occupying Power, and the Israeli military authorities, are duty-bound to respect and uphold the provisions of the fourth Geneva Convention 1/ and of other norms of international law. We wish to see all the parties concerned co-operate with the Secretary-General in promoting orderly arrangements for the early withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon.

213. We regret, however, that the draft resolution, despite the positive aspects I have mentioned, takes insufficient account of the need to dampen the cycle of violence, which has been given a new and ghastly twist over the weekend, and to promote the peaceful diplomatic solution so urgently needed. In particular there is no mention in the draft resolution of the role of UNIFIL or of the need to assist the Secretary-General’s efforts in pursuance of Council resolution 555 (1984) and to encourage an immediate return to the Naqoura talks. We believe that in the present circumstances it would have been better not to put it to a vote.

214. My Government therefore felt obliged to abstain.

215. Mr. TROYANOVSKY (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) (interpretation from Russian): Since I spoke yesterday to express my gratitude for the expressions of condolences on the passing away of the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and the President of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, many other delegations have extended their sympathy to our delegation. We should like once again to say that we are extremely grateful for these expressions of condolences and sympathy and that we shall transmit them to Moscow, to our Government and to the members of the family of the deceased.

216. The PRESIDENT (interpretation from French): I call on the representative of Lebanon.

217. Mr. FAKHOURY (Lebanon) (interpretation from Arabic): The result of the vote on the draft resolution did not surprise us, because when we called for the Council to be convened, we knew the different positions that would be taken, whether in favour, against or abstaining. We are not amateurs in the collection of resolutions. The Council has adopted numerous resolutions, but they have remained dead letters.

218. We have rights, and they need no consecration through the adoption of a resolution. Here we act as independent sovereign States.

219. The representative of the United States has recognized that the Government of Lebanon did not intimidate; on the contrary, it was trying to abort intimidation. The real threat is against Lebanon and against its people in the south, in western Bekaa and the Rashaya district. That was the crux of our complaint.

220. If some members had been true to themselves they would have condemned the arbitrary and inhumane practices of the occupying army, as they have already condemned the Israeli invasion. Those practices are inevitable results of that invasion, part and parcel of it. Today those members have opposed condemnation of the consequences of the invasion. The Council has failed to meet its obligations because of the American veto, and has left the populations of southern Lebanon, the Rashaya district and western Bekaa victims of the Israeli army. That veto has encouraged Israel to proceed with its brutal policies and its defiance of the Council and the international community.

221. This stand will not weaken our will; it will not affect our insistence on liberating southern Lebanon, Bekaa and Rashaya from the yoke of the Israeli occupation. We shall liberate those regions Lebanon, which we cherish, by all means, and in the first place through legitimate national resistance, which is in accord with the resolutions of the United Nations.

222. Through thousands of years of history, Lebanon has witnessed interventions by numerous armies of occupation. These armies are gone, but Lebanon remains.

223. The false statements of the representative of Israel deserve no reply, and therefore we shall ignore them.

224. The PRESIDENT (interpretation from French): The Security Council has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of this agenda item.

The meeting rose at 2.25 p.m.



1/ Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949 (United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 75. No. 973).

2/ United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 75, nos. 970-973.

* Quoted by the speaker in English.

>> Complete document (pdf)

Follow UNISPAL RSS Twitter